Some psychologist must have come up with a name for the complex where we claim to idolise someone and in doing so hope that others see us in their mould.
Boris and Churchill, Truss and Thatcher, Marc Zuckerberg and Augustus, every young footballer and Ronaldo…
This is the sign of someone who doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to understand wit, or, is just a self-serving twat who speed-reads other people’s work and tinkers with the nuance in order pass said nuance off as his or her own to seem well-read and cultured.
Or in this particular instance, both.
G.E please you incompetent gang of crooks and/or amateurs.
The fact that she cited the writer in particular with the added detail of “Anything by”, means she wants to be associated with his line of thinking or his subjects ideology.
In reality, she has cited this writer because he has written about right-wing presidents in America.
This should tell you all you need to know about her. She thinks that she is going to be up there with Nixon and Reagen, and wants this writer to write about her.
A sycophantic tinpot despot who is singularly in this job for the wrong reasons. How are you Tories not up in arms over this?
General Election.
Let me summarise (and in some ways improve upon) that not-especially-good article. So: . .
Liz Truss has professed admiration for the historian Rick Perlstein. Perlstein is North American and has published, among other things, *The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of Reagan* (2014). That book treats Regan’s attempt to convince Americans that making the rich richer makes everyone richer. Perlstein says, today, that his book portrays that attempt as an attempted *deception*, and that it is clear enough that the book *condemns* such deceptions. Yet – Perlstein continues – Truss seems to take his work as presenting Regan’s deception as an *inspiration* and even a *model*.
Well she hasn’t finished reading it yet. God, you people, always jumping to conclusions and not cutting her some slack 😉
The good news is we will laugh about this 4 month period in years to come, and nobody will believe just how awful it was…
Wouldn’t be the first time a venerated historian/philosopher/author has been wildly misunderstood by a political leader with the critical thinking ability of a spoon.
Truss was a Lib Dem when she was younger, around the time Reagan was President. She has obviously changed her views but she would have despised him at the time for his economic policy. She knows exactly what Reagan is about and I cannot believe she misinterpreted a book on him. I suspect she has never read the book and just said she liked it based on the title.
9 comments
Some psychologist must have come up with a name for the complex where we claim to idolise someone and in doing so hope that others see us in their mould.
Boris and Churchill, Truss and Thatcher, Marc Zuckerberg and Augustus, every young footballer and Ronaldo…
This is the sign of someone who doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to understand wit, or, is just a self-serving twat who speed-reads other people’s work and tinkers with the nuance in order pass said nuance off as his or her own to seem well-read and cultured.
Or in this particular instance, both.
G.E please you incompetent gang of crooks and/or amateurs.
The fact that she cited the writer in particular with the added detail of “Anything by”, means she wants to be associated with his line of thinking or his subjects ideology.
In reality, she has cited this writer because he has written about right-wing presidents in America.
This should tell you all you need to know about her. She thinks that she is going to be up there with Nixon and Reagen, and wants this writer to write about her.
A sycophantic tinpot despot who is singularly in this job for the wrong reasons. How are you Tories not up in arms over this?
General Election.
Let me summarise (and in some ways improve upon) that not-especially-good article. So: . .
Liz Truss has professed admiration for the historian Rick Perlstein. Perlstein is North American and has published, among other things, *The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of Reagan* (2014). That book treats Regan’s attempt to convince Americans that making the rich richer makes everyone richer. Perlstein says, today, that his book portrays that attempt as an attempted *deception*, and that it is clear enough that the book *condemns* such deceptions. Yet – Perlstein continues – Truss seems to take his work as presenting Regan’s deception as an *inspiration* and even a *model*.
Well she hasn’t finished reading it yet. God, you people, always jumping to conclusions and not cutting her some slack 😉
The good news is we will laugh about this 4 month period in years to come, and nobody will believe just how awful it was…
Wouldn’t be the first time a venerated historian/philosopher/author has been wildly misunderstood by a political leader with the critical thinking ability of a spoon.
Truss was a Lib Dem when she was younger, around the time Reagan was President. She has obviously changed her views but she would have despised him at the time for his economic policy. She knows exactly what Reagan is about and I cannot believe she misinterpreted a book on him. I suspect she has never read the book and just said she liked it based on the title.
This is just like [that scene](https://youtu.be/vTSmbMm7MDg) in *Annie Hall* with Marshall McLuhan.
Add it to the list. She misunderstands everything.
Liz is the walking, talking examplar of the Dunning-Kruger effect.